Memory

• Define the multistore model of memory

  A representation of memory as a series of 3 interconnected stores.
• Give the sensory register's 2 main stores

  ionic memory= visual information coded visually

  echoic memory=auditory information coded acoustically
• Draw the multistore model of memory

  .

  A) maintenance rehearsal

  B) decay or displacement

  C) elaborate rehearsal

  D) interference or retrieval failure

  
• Give the coding, capacity, and duration of the sensory register

  Coding: sensory specific

  capacity: unlimited

  duration: milliseconds
• Give the coding, capacity, and duration of STM

  Coding: acoustically

  capacity: 7+/-2 items

  duration: 18 seconds but 30 seconds with rehearsal
• Give the coding, capacity, and duration of LTM

  Coding: semantically

  capacity: unlimited

  duration: up to a lifetime
• What was the research on coding?

  Baddeley gave different lists of words to 4 groups to remember. When asked to recall immediately after hearing (STM recall), they tended to do worse with acoustically similar words. When asked to recall after 20 minutes (LTM recall), they did worse with semantically similar words. This suggests that information is coded semantically in LTM and acoustically in STM.
• What was Jacobs research on capacity?

  Jacobs developed a technique to measure digit span. The researcher gives, for example, 4 digits and then the participant recalls them in the correct order out loud. If correct, the researcher reads 5 digits and so on until the participant cannot recall correctly. Jacobs found that the mean span for letters was 7.3.
• What was Millers research on capacity?

  Miller made observations and noticed that things come in sevens. He suggested that the span of STM is about 7 items (±2). Miller also noted that people can recall 5 words as well as 5 letters. People do this by chunking (grouping sets of digits or letters into units or chunks).
• What was Peterson and Peterson's research on duration?

  They had 24 students given a consonant syllable to remember and a 3-digit number to count backward from until told to stop (this prevented rehearsal of the consonant syllable). On each trial they were told to stop after a different amount of time, this is called the retention interval. The higher the retention interval the lower the amount of correct responses. They concluded that STM may have a very short duration unless we repeat something over and over again.
• What was Bahrick et al.'s research on duration?

  They studied 392 participants, aged between 17 and 74. Recall was tested in many ways using their high school yearbooks. Those tested within 15 years of graduation were most accurate (90%)in photo recognition. After 48 years, recall declined to about 70% for photo recognition, however, this is still accurate. They concluded that LTM can last a very long time.
• Evaluate the MSM

  STRENGTH: support from amnesia patients- e.g. HM shows you can have STM without LTM, meaning they are 2 separate stores

  STRENGTH: research support- Baddeley shows STM is acoustic and LTM is semantic

  WEAKNESS: STM is a unitary store- KF case study provides evidence for there being a STM for visual and auditory material
• Define episodic memory

  It is memory for events in our lives. Episodic memory is explicit (it requires conscious recall).
• Define semantic memory

  It is memory for knowledge of the world, it includes language. Semantic memory is explicit (it requires conscious recall).
• Define procedural memory

  It is memory for automatic and often skilled behaviours. Procedural memory is implicit (it doesn't require conscious recall).
• Evaluate LTM

  STRENGTH: Neurological evidence- episodic and procedural recalled from different parts of the prefrontal cortex. Procedural from the cerebellum and episodic from the right prefrontal cortex

  STRENGTH: Clinical evidence- HM, had damaged episodic memories but semantic and procedural memories were fine

  WEAKNESS: 3 types or 2?- CC had damaged episodic and semantic but procedural was fine. Semantic and episodic may be the same because both are declarative, located in the cortex, and coded the same way.
• Define the working model of memory (WMM)

  A model that shows the dynamic processing in STM.
• Describe the function of the central executive

  Co-ordinates slave systems and allocates resources, it have a very limited storage.
• Describe the function of the phonological loop

  Deals with auditory information. The phonological store, stores the words you hear and the articulatory process allows maintenance rehearsal.
• Describe the function of the visuo-spatial sketchpad

  stores visual and/or spatial information when required. Limited capacity, around 3 or 4 objects (according to Baddeley). Sub-divided into the visual cache (stores visual data) and inner scribe (records the arrangement of objects in the visual field).
• Describe the function of the episodic buffer

  Integrates processing of slave systems and records the order of events. It is linked to the LTM. Limited capacity of about 4 chunks.
• Evaluate the WMM

  STRENGTH: Clinical evidence- amnesia patient named KF had poor auditory, but good visual. Suggesting that he had a damaged phonological loop but the VSS was fine.

  STRENGTH: Duel-task performance- difficult to do 2 visual tasks at the same time, but one visual and one verbal is okay (Baddeley et al.). Means there must be a separate slave system (the VSS) that processes visual input

  WEAKNESS: Lack of clarity about the central executive- Case study on EVR, had poor decision-making skills but good reasoning skills. CE more complex, perhaps separate stores for these functions.
• Define interference as an explanation for forgetting

  Forgetting because one memory blocks another, causing one or both memories to be distorted or forgotten. Mainly for LTM.
• Name the 2 types of interference

  proactive interference- old memories disrupt new ones

  retroactive interference- new memories disrupt old ones
• Give an example of proactive interference

  Learnt Spanish first and then learnt French second. Spanish interferes with the recall of the French words
• Give an example of retroactive interference

  Learnt Spanish first, then learnt French second. French interferes with the recall of Spanish words.
• What effect does similarity have on interference?

  Similar words create more interference
• Evaluate Interference as an explanation for forgetting

  STRENGTH: Evidence from lab studies- McGeoch and Mcdonald's study on retroactive interference shows that most similar material produced the worst recall

  STRENGTH: Real-life studies- Baddeley and Hitch's rugby player study supports interference and shows it can be applied to everyday situations

  WEAKNESS: Artificial materials- Lists of words are not like everyday memory. May overemphasise interference as an explanation.
• Outline McGeoch and Mcdonald's study on retroactive interference

  They studied retroactive interference by changing the amount of similarity between 2 sets of materials. Participants had to learn a list of 10 words until they could remember all of them. Then, they learned a new list. The six groups learned different types of lists. They found that the most similar material produced the worst recall, meaning that interference is strongest when memories are similar.
• Define retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting

  A form of forgetting. It occurs when we don't have the necessary cues to access memory. The memory is available but not accessible unless a suitable cue is provided.
• What is the Encoding Specificity Principle (ESP)?

  If a cue is to help us recall information, it has to be present at encoding and retrieval. (pattern discovered by Tulving)
• What are the 2 main types of cues?

  Context-dependent forgetting (external cues) and state-dependent forgetting (internal cues).
• What was Godden and Baddeley's study on context-dependent forgetting?

  Gave Divers a list of words and there were 4 conditions. Learn on land-recall on land, learn on land-recall underwater, learn underwater-recall on land, learn underwater-recall underwater. The accurate recall was 40% lower in the non-matching conditions. The external cues available at learning were different from the ones at recall and this led to retrieval failure.
• What was Carter and Cassaday's study on state-dependent forgetting?

  Anti-histamines had a mild sedative effect making the participants slightly drowsy, this creates an internal psychological state different from the ''normal'' state of being awake and alert. Learn list of words in 4 conditions: learn on drug-recall on it, learn on it-recall off it, learn without it-recall on it, learn without it-recall off it. Was a mismatch between internal state at learning and recall means that performance on the memory test was significantly worse. More forgetting when cues absent.
• Evaluate retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting

  STRENGTH: Supporting evidence- Divers and anti-histamines study. Eysneck (prominent memory researcher) claims retrieval failure is the most important reason for LTM forgetting

  STRENGTH: Real-world application- for students revising and basic principle in cognitive interview

  WEAKNESS: Questioning context effects- No forgetting unless contexts are very different, e.g. divers study.
• Name factors affecting eye-witness testimonies (EWT)

  Misleading information- leading questions and post-event discussion.

  Anxiety- positive and negative effects.
• Outline Loftus and Palmer's research on leading question

  The students watched film clips of car accidents and they were asked how fast the car was going. 5 groups, each given a different verb. E.g. smashed, collided, contacted etc. The mean calculated for each group: contacted was around 31.8mph and smashed was around 40.5mph. The leading question biased the eyewitness recall of an event.
• What was the 2 explanations for why leading questions affect EWT?

  1. Response bias: wording of question has no real effect on participants' memories, just influences how they decide to answer
  2. Substitution explanation: the wording of the leading question actually changes the participants memory of the film clip. Supported by Loftus and Palmer and report of presence of glass (using ''Smashed'' verb)
• Outline Gabbert et al.'s research on post-event discussion

  Participants in pairs. Each participant watched a video of the same crime, but filmed from a different point of view. Both participants then discussed what they each saw. Then both individually completed a test of recall. 71% of participants mistakenly recalled aspects of the event that they did not see in the video. In control group, it was 0%.
• What did Gabbert et al. conclude from their study about post-event discussion?

  The witnesses often go along with each other, either to win social approval or because they believe the others are right. They called this phenomenon memory conformity